Posted on 03/20/2013 5:30:28 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The Service Employees International Union applauded Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul for announcing that he supports an immigration bill that would include a pathway to legalization for existing illegal immigrants. In the statement emailed to reporters (it doesn’t appear to be online) SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Eliseo Medina said:
The diversity behind the voices in support of commonsense immigration reform continues to grow, strengthening the call for a solution this year. The GOP should heed Sen. Rand Paul’s words today and truly join the consensus that wants Congress to pass a bill that will create a just roadmap to citizenship, boost our economy and keep families together.
With more bipartisan support coming to the fore, the momentum for a real and lasting solution to our broken immigration system demonstrates the readiness of the American public. In the past few days, we have seen Greenpeace, the Evangelical community, conservative leaders and other African American groups uniting with the American majority for immigration reform.......
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Rand has demonstrated a pretty good record to date, but I agree I always expected him to go off the rails with either one or more of the familiar trio of libertarian passions... open-borders, homo-marriage, and dope. Any of which would lead me to drop him like a hot potato, preventing me from ever supporting him for higher office.
He does not support homo-marriage, dope or open borders. He believes in the 10th amendment and that marriage and drugs are a state issue. As for borders he wants them more secure not open.
Experience has taught me not to trust libertarians on these issues, as that they often use federalism as just a blind to hide their true beliefs.
Take the dope issue as the prime example. The 10th Amendment argument. All well and good. Libertarians always calmly make these points when I discuss it with them. But when I mention how the 10th Amendment should also mean a state can outlaw dope and enforce very strict laws, and these same folks get all upset and animated on this point. Much more exercised than when arguing federalism. Invariably reveals DOPE is what they care about, more than state’s rights.
Anyway, that’s just my anecdotal experience over the years, and one of the reasons I’ve grown distrustful. And that doesn’t even take into account the uneasy fact that Rand is Ron Paul’s son.
Marriage is a religious concept, accept it or not.
Civil unions can be sanctioned by the government or not, I do not care.
I have for decades believed that the word “marriage” should not be in the tax code, people should be taxed on their own income with dependents.
We began to have problems when government stepped in and forced (defined) no fault divorce, that diminished marriage.
The government does not sanction and it should not my baptism and they need to stay out of my marriage.
The government has no business defining marriage.
They have an interest in encouraging committed unions, NOT called marriage which is a religious concept.
Chamelion!
fine that is your view, I disagree .
Govt is involved in marriage regardless how many times a liberal tarian keeps shouting Govt out of my life
They have justice of the peace which we got married, not you , we have divorce, hell who do you think will say you get the kids and the house and dog.
as for your last line , habe you actually thought past the slogan of Govt out of my life about who gets the kids, yes Govt
If you want marriage as 4 women and one guy, two men, or a horse and a man then so be it but don;t be suddenly shocked to find others think that is whacky
just re read it, it;s not religious at all , tell me I got married with a justice of the peace, Govt decides who get the house, think about it past the nice little liberal tarian slogan and bumper sticker
it;s religious, FFS, [sighs]
The SEIU was all around McCain in 2007 when he pushed illegal alien amnesty. They even did some press and photo ops together
I have zero idea what you said
Marriage whether you agree or not is a religious concept.
Marriage is a representation of Christ and His bride, everything else is a civil union
Yes, the 10th allows states to ban drugs if they want. Some have decided not to like CO and WA. The Feds have got no business banning drugs under the constitution and seizing powers that have been left to the states under the 10th amendment. It’s very clear but we’ve just had authoritarians in power (both parties) who think the Federal government should be involved in pretty much everything when they shouldn’t.
guess my justice of the peace never got me married 17 years ago because my wifes religion and my relgion were different and we kept out the religious comments.
Anyway off to tell the wife, ooppss sorry not the wife now that we never really got married because it the wedding wasn;t religious .
Hang on that marriage certificate I got was from the Govt, mmmmmmmmm
ARF
OH and when one gets a divorce who do you think decides who gets what and wher the kdis go, Yep Govt does
Anyone thinking marriage is anything you want it to be and then harp the crap of Govt out of it is fooling themelves or has a motive.
Marriage is one man and one woman has it has always been, studies show kids do better with a mother and a father.
Turd poking and being turned on by feces is a mental disease
eye roll
Not me - I agree that the 10th 'cuts both ways.' But I never claimed to be a libertarian.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.